They did the work...
If Aereo simply sent the received signal, unchanged, unaltered, and as-is to your device, chances are they wouldn't have ended up in court. What they actually did was reencode the signal and rebroadcast it to you. Entirely two different things.
And its also why your contrived example falls down. Because they didn't run a wire which carried the same signal, they altered the signal.
Who is going to be fined? (I assume that is what you meant) The people doing the manipulation, so the people aNonnyMouseCowered allege that are manipulating the market. Who would do the fining? The SEC, the FCA or another countries financial authority. Wouldn't take much for them to do it either.
There is no statute of limitations in play here, as his case is actively being pursued and he is acting as a fugitive to that pursuance. He can stay in the embassy for 50 years and the case could still be taken up in the courts.
You mean, market manipulation? Something several big banks just got fined millions of dollars for in the forex markets? That should be an interesting one to watch...
Thats great - doesn't help me tho if the goal is to replace residential grid power with locally generated solar power tho, does it?
Really? Its 15.54 currently here in the UK, and its already dark. And I'm not even home yet. When I get home, there's the heating to go on (gas, luckily), food to be cooked (gas hob, electric oven), the house to be lit (electric), housework to be done (electric), and then entertainment for the evening (usually electric consuming). So from when I get home at 17.30 to when I go to bed at 22.30, there's 5 hours of electricity usage.
And that's not counting things like night storage heaters, economy 7 power use washing machines or dish washers that can be put on overnight etc.
So yes, the bulk of our power usage (and Im not the poster you replied to) is over night.
Why would Netflix give them access to that data?
Bankers drafts *are* cleared funds - the drawer pays the bank the sum of money, and the bank issues a cheque for that amount in its own name - once the recipient is in possession of the bankers draft, the original drawer is out of the equation, all interactions are then between the recipient and the bank. Unless something very very very unusual happens at the banks end, its a guaranteed transaction. Without the bankers draft, the drawer has no way to cancel the transaction - even if he loses it.
Debit card transactions have never been cleared funds however, as they occur based on one of several basis and can be reversed.
BACS transfers can also be reversed (had a once major UK supermarket do this with my wages back when I had just quit - deposited my wages in the morning as normal, so I drew some cash out. Came to pay something by debit card later that day and it was refused - odd as I should have had a lot of money in that account, but it had all vanished. The supermarket employer had reversed the BACS because they had "miscalculated" my end wage - infact they had undercalculated it, but instead of just giving me the difference they reversed the entire payment and
Is that in the UK? Never heard of that before, and certainly never came across it in the UK - if you don't have a guarantee card, the cheque would be refused, it was that simple.
What you are describing is what I already described via method #2. If and only if they are able to add their root public key to the user's computer will their fraudulently issued certificates successfully validate.
Actually I wasn't, because you specifically said in #2 "Somehow maliciously insert their own public key onto your computer". Key there is "maliciously". No need to do that as most governments have legitimately issued root CA certs in most browsers already. Including China...
No need to maliciously insert anything, they are already there waiting to be used.
Cheques are notoriously bad for guaranteed payment - businesses would only accept a cheque if your bank also issued you with a cheque guarantee card (usually just a different design on your debit card), which means the bank would guarantee to cash the cheque up to a certain amount, taking the matter up with the writer of the cheque if it bounced. If you tried to cash a cheque without a guarantee (or a cheque over the guarantee amount) and it bounces, you are SOL and have to take it up with the writer yourself.
And cheque guarantees usually only went up to a few hundred quid.
Car dealers would typically want a bankers draft, which is a bit of paper issued by your bank for a specific amount and is treated as cash - the value is held on the paper, its not an instruction to transfer money, its an actual promissory note just like paper note cash is. Lose the bankers draft, and the money is gone, you can't get it back.
Bankers drafts cost you money to buy, and you have to go to a bank to have one issued.
Pretty much no larger business accepts cheques these days in the UK, and hasn't for several years - cheques have essentially been relegated to inter-personal transactions or smaller business (single person style businesses) because of the cost of handling them as a business.
Such "contracts" hold little to no water in the UK, which is why Trading Standards is involved - this hotel is going to get buttfucked from here to Singapore by quite a few government bodies over this, and quite probably lose their merchant status for accepting cards.
Have you seem the list of CA root certs in a normal browser install these days? Its in the dozens, if not hundreds. A signed cert by any one of those is equally good for any site, unless you are also checking known signatures...